Re: bg worker: patch 1 of 6 - permanent process

Excerpts from Markus Wanner's message of mar sep 14 12:56:59 -0400 2010:

> What bugs me a bit is that I didn't really get much feedback regarding 
> the *bgworker* portion of code. Especially as that's the part I'm most 
> interested in feedback.

I think we've had enough problems with the current design of forking a
new autovac process every once in a while, that I'd like to have them as
permanent processes instead, waiting for orders from the autovac
launcher.  From that POV, bgworkers would make sense.

I cannot promise a timely review however :-(

-- 
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support